politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sabisky decides to go of his own accord

Lock him up.

In another too many tweets make a tw@ news.

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/1229500344046161921

Third like Eadric?

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Crappy Beeb dramas:
Poirot with Pascal Sauvage from Jonny English
A Christmas Carol
Recent Dr Who (not the fault of Jody Whittaker who is good imo)

20 minutes in and Labour debate now onto trans rights

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

MarqueeMark said:

Third question about trans rights......

Economy, maybe guys, you know, stuff that is going to sway Labour --> Tory voters?

For the key Labour-Green swing voters though...

AlastairMeeks said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sabisky has resigned

About bloody time.

Disagree, he should never have been appointed. He stands as a monument to Cummings’ stupidity, arrogance and atrocious judgment.

RobD said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

RobD said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Then you've misread my comments. I made no statement on believing in eugenics. In fact, quite the contrary. Yet alone wish it to return to vogue.

I agree with the environment and nutrition points but that wouldn't address some genetic factors that lead to unpleasant diseases and illnesses.

The good news is that gene editing (note: not eugenics) might provide a solution there as we could manipulate DNA and code to get there rather than relying on stigmatism, sterilisation and termination (although there are ethical issues there too) and access to this might largely be restricted by wealth.

I see. Genetic predisposition toward diseases is an interesting subject that I know nothing about. Given the right conditions, nobody should have a predisposition to a disease - at least not one that comes to anything.

I thought there were genetic markers that indicated increase chance of getting certain types of cancer, for example.

Yes, there are. But given that some get away with never getting it despite having the marker, it's more a shared vulnerability isn't it? Something that causes the cancer, causes it particularly much in you if you have that marker. Like being tall. Being tall is a marker for bashing your head if you don't duck when passing low beams. It is not something that you would want to edit out of your genetic code per se.

Yeah, not everyone gets cancer, but it has been shown that if you have this marker you are more at risk. Doesn't that suggest there are genetic predisposition to diseases?

Yes. But potentially only in today's world. One doesn't evolve a predisposition to a disease does one? How could that happen? We live in a far more disease prone world than we used to. Modern medicine masks that. The first recorded heart attack in America was in the 1920's.

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

Dr Who is children’s tv, surely?

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

The Americans churn them out until they become so dreadful that everyone loses interest.

MarqueeMark said:

Third question about trans rights......

Economy, maybe guys, you know, stuff that is going to sway Labour --> Tory voters?

It's Channel 4.

It could be worse, it could've been Channel 5.

MarqueeMark said:

AlastairMeeks said:

This aged well:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/02/why-number-10-arent-backing-down-over-andrew-sabisky/

They didn't back down.

Sabisky resigned.

Yeah, right.

Luckyguy1983 said:

RobD said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

RobD said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Then you've misread my comments. I made no statement on believing in eugenics. In fact, quite the contrary. Yet alone wish it to return to vogue.

I agree with the environment and nutrition points but that wouldn't address some genetic factors that lead to unpleasant diseases and illnesses.

The good news is that gene editing (note: not eugenics) might provide a solution there as we could manipulate DNA and code to get there rather than relying on stigmatism, sterilisation and termination (although there are ethical issues there too) and access to this might largely be restricted by wealth.

I see. Genetic predisposition toward diseases is an interesting subject that I know nothing about. Given the right conditions, nobody should have a predisposition to a disease - at least not one that comes to anything.

I thought there were genetic markers that indicated increase chance of getting certain types of cancer, for example.

Yes, there are. But given that some get away with never getting it despite having the marker, it's more a shared vulnerability isn't it? Something that causes the cancer, causes it particularly much in you if you have that marker. Like being tall. Being tall is a marker for bashing your head if you don't duck when passing low beams. It is not something that you would want to edit out of your genetic code per se.

Yeah, not everyone gets cancer, but it has been shown that if you have this marker you are more at risk. Doesn't that suggest there are genetic predisposition to diseases?

Yes. But potentially only in today's world. One doesn't evolve a predisposition to a disease does one? How could that happen? We live in a far more disease prone world than we used to. Modern medicine masks that. The first recorded heart attack in America was in the 1920's.

They do, because it has happened. Evolution is due to random mutations, some good, some bad. As for heart attacks, I sincerely doubt that that was the first ever heart attack.

EPG said:

ydoethur said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sabisky has resigned

About bloody time.

Disagree, he should never have been appointed. He stands as a monument to Cummings’ stupidity, arrogance and atrocious judgment.

Let it be noted that you were right about Cummings, again.

My legendary modesty forbad me to say it.

But I did think it.

Philip_Thompson said:

IanB2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

The Americans churn them out until they become so dreadful that everyone loses interest.

100 episodes of greatness followed by some crap is better than 6 decent episodes but then no followup.

I agree, the Americans can produce 100 watchable episodes of anything within 3 years, followed by writers block and repetitions.

The BBC tried it only once with Allo Allo.

Nandy wants a 'social license' for business

EPG said:

BluestBlue said:

Poor chap. If he wanted a backlog of crazy personal views to be not only excused, but passionately defended, he should have run for Labour leader instead...

From "a somewhat heavy-handed idea ... I do approve of the shock value" to "crazy personal views". Do you blow with the wind as quick?

I still approve of the shock value, and don't think he should have resigned, simply because we need to break the cancel culture once and for all.

I threw in the 'crazy views' part now just for an added rhetorical effect in pointing out how being batshit insane is no impediment to leading the Labour Party, so why should it be disqualifying for a mere SpAd?

HYUFD said:

Starmer says Labour needs to regain its 'message of opportunity'

I would have said a ‘message of sanity’ would be a better starting point.

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Sherlock started well, then it disappeared up its own arse and became self-referential and shite.

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Sherlock started well, then it disappeared up its own arse and became self-referential and shite.

I watch a lot of Daytime TV, so do my parents, and we almost always watch the BBC. It may be rubbish to some people, but I am prepared to say I think a lot of it is very good

Starmer being a bit shouty. Nandy rather low key. RLB winning here for me and by a distance. Rather surprised.

HYUFD said:

Nandy says she would scrap the monarchy, Starmer would keep it but downsize it, Long Bailey would also keep it

What exactly did Nandy say?

Her own personal view but? Or a referendum? Or a republic established as soon as she wins a GE?

Which one?

kinabalu said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Fleabag. Mum.

Fleabag your mum.

kinabalu said:

Starmer being a bit shouty. Nandy rather low key. RLB winning here for me and by a distance. Rather surprised.

As a neutral I would say Starmer and Long Bailey both doing OK, Nandy a bit below par and saying she would scrap the monarchy will not help her with Leave voters Labour has lost

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Sherlock started well, then it disappeared up its own arse and became self-referential and shite.

The last season of Sherlock was truly awful.

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

Starmer being a bit shouty. Nandy rather low key. RLB winning here for me and by a distance. Rather surprised.

As a neutral I would say Starmer and Long Bailey both doing OK, Nandy a bit below par and saying she would scrap the monarchy will not help her with Leave voters Labour has lost

You are the least neutral person I know.

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Sherlock started well, then it disappeared up its own arse and became self-referential and shite.

The last season of Sherlock was truly awful.

Watson's wife being a ninja secret agent was utterly WTF????

Alistair said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

And many of those 24 episodes are filler bollocks.

The syndication model absolutely destroys many good American shows by forcing them to reach 24 episodes.

Lots of great 'half season' (10 to 13 episode shows) get picked up and suddenly have to fill 24 episodes.

One of the best things about the HBO revolution was US shows only having as many episodes as they needed to tell the story and zero filler.

And the cable and net producers have come up with some shows that stood the long run - Sopranos, Sons of Anarchy, arguably The Wire (although I think this did drift). Yet some long running shows like Vikings still turn into ludicrous parodies of themselves.

The Wire was 13 episode seasons, so they produced 2.5 'full' seasons of it over the 5 years.

Phenomenal show.

Or 10 full BBC seasons over the 5 years.

A lot of good shows are 13 Stateside. Currently watching The Good Doctor which I believe is 13 per series.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Crappy Beeb dramas:
Poirot with Pascal Sauvage from Jonny English
A Christmas Carol
Recent Dr Who (not the fault of Jody Whittaker who is good imo)

I have a rather heretical view: I really liked Poirot with Cyrus The Virus and Ron from Harry Potter. I figure now David Suchet has nailed the set, it frees the field for looser interpretations.

AlastairMeeks said:

TimT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

In another too many tweets make a tw@ news.

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/1229500344046161921

That doesn’t seem a smart approach from camp Bloomberg. Why give airtime to your rival’s talking points?

Because it plays to and reinforces an existing meme that Sanders' people are not really Democrats and would prefer to destroy other Democrats rather than unite behind a candidate who can beat Trump.

Perhaps. Doesn’t invalidate the observations about Michael Bloomberg. Many will simply believe both attack lines.

Yeah, it's not without the dangers you point out. But Mike is not ever going to win over the liberal wing of the party, or those Bernie supporters who won't vote for any other Democratic candidate.

His strong message, which he is hammering home in his TV ads, is as a uniter who gets things done and can beat Trump. Given beating Trump is time after time the number 1 issue for Dem voters, I think the calculation is that showing Bernie not to be that man outweighs the limited potential downside, and explains the re-tweeting.

FF43 said:

Superforecaster Sabisky didn't see that coming ..

The Oracle was closed this morning due to unforeseen circumstances.

speedy2 said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

And many of those 24 episodes are filler bollocks.

The syndication model absolutely destroys many good American shows by forcing them to reach 24 episodes.

Lots of great 'half season' (10 to 13 episode shows) get picked up and suddenly have to fill 24 episodes.

One of the best things about the HBO revolution was US shows only having as many episodes as they needed to tell the story and zero filler.

And the cable and net producers have come up with some shows that stood the long run - Sopranos, Sons of Anarchy, arguably The Wire (although I think this did drift). Yet some long running shows like Vikings still turn into ludicrous parodies of themselves.

They need material.

Those shows always had material as long as there was no fixed beginning or ending.

Thankfully Vikings is in its last series. What started as a historically quite interesting drama of the Viking era, with credible storylines with some modest artistic licence but also nice touches like using bits of Old Norse and Old English, has slowly turned into a parody of the absurd with Lagertha’s lesbian republic, the cult of Ivar, and last week a full scale D-Day style beach landing complete with replica WWII landing craft.

Casino_Royale said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

kinabalu said:

Starmer being a bit shouty. Nandy rather low key. RLB winning here for me and by a distance. Rather surprised.

As a neutral I would say Starmer and Long Bailey both doing OK, Nandy a bit below par and saying she would scrap the monarchy will not help her with Leave voters Labour has lost

You are the least neutral person I know.

Ahem. Hello?

Lol. Yes. But then as far as we know HY isn’t a habitual daytime drinker.

Alistair said:

MarqueeMark said:

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Sherlock started well, then it disappeared up its own arse and became self-referential and shite.

The last season of Sherlock was truly awful.

Watson's wife being a ninja secret agent was utterly WTF????

That was one of the few highlights. Killing her off for no reason at all was the WTF.

But it was a stupid rabbit hole to go down, because if they didn't then kill her pronto she would have over-shadowed Sherlock himself.

IanB2 said:

speedy2 said:

IanB2 said:

Alistair said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

And many of those 24 episodes are filler bollocks.

The syndication model absolutely destroys many good American shows by forcing them to reach 24 episodes.

Lots of great 'half season' (10 to 13 episode shows) get picked up and suddenly have to fill 24 episodes.

One of the best things about the HBO revolution was US shows only having as many episodes as they needed to tell the story and zero filler.

And the cable and net producers have come up with some shows that stood the long run - Sopranos, Sons of Anarchy, arguably The Wire (although I think this did drift). Yet some long running shows like Vikings still turn into ludicrous parodies of themselves.

They need material.

Those shows always had material as long as there was no fixed beginning or ending.

Thankfully Vikings is in its last series. What started as a historically quite interesting drama of the Viking era, with credible storylines with some modest artistic licence but also nice touches like using bits of Old Norse and Old English, has slowly turned into a parody of the absurd with Lagertha’s lesbian republic, the cult of Ivar, and last week a full scale D-Day style beach landing complete with replica WWII landing craft.

The only story thread of Vikings I am still remotely interested in is Floki's Icelandic settlement.

Casino_Royale said:

viewcode said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Crappy Beeb dramas:
Poirot with Pascal Sauvage from Jonny English
A Christmas Carol
Recent Dr Who (not the fault of Jody Whittaker who is good imo)

I have a rather heretical view: I really liked Poirot with Cyrus The Virus and Ron from Harry Potter. I figure now David Suchet has nailed the set, it frees the field for looser interpretations.

The Director General of the BBC should have been arrested for that travesty of a Poirot.

There is only one Poirot and it is David Suggest.

My Mum's cousin did the titles for the David Suchet one

MarqueeMark said:

Third question about trans rights......

Economy, maybe guys, you know, stuff that is going to sway Labour --> Tory voters?

The impact of the stupid pledges Nandy and RLB have signed up to have annoyed a lot of women. A lot.

Labour is basically telling women that they don’t know what being a woman means, that their concerns about safety, about the impact on the Equality Act as it affects women of self-id without a medical diagnosis are of no interest to them, to be dismissed without more in order to accommodate the views of some trans extremists, that if they express such concern they will be expelled from the party and ignored and labelled.

Their behaviour is, ironically, rather similar to the way they dismissed the concerns of Jewish Labour members. According to Labour if you label a group in a particular way it is ok to demean and bully them. So any woman raising concerns about self-id is simply labelled as hateful and ignored rather than any attempt made to understand her concerns let alone engage with them and come up with a practical solution.Quite why Labour has decided to pick on a majority this time rather than a minority, God knows. But yes I’d say that exposing Labour’s stupidity on this is important. Quite apart from the immediate issue it tells me two things:-

1. Labour has not really learnt anything about why this putting people into groups and labelling them according to some predetermined, thoughtless and usually idiotic filter is nonsensical.
2. Nandy has shown a lack of judgment on this issue which has shown that she still is not ready to be leader.

IanB2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

Dr Who is children’s tv, surely?

Technically, no: it's made by the drama department. Factually: well it kind of varies...

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1229496526541553665?s=21

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1229496526541553665?s=20

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1229496526541553665?s=20

As I was saying...

I have never ever watched any of the shows you guys are mentioning. Apart from Fleabag which I loved. When do you all find the time to watch all this TV, I’d like to know.

AlastairMeeks said:

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1229496526541553665?s=21

1) He should never have been appointed so exactly how he left is probably not relevant;

2) It is Cummings that should be fired, although again, he should never have been appointed.

viewcode said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Crappy Beeb dramas:
Poirot with Pascal Sauvage from Jonny English
A Christmas Carol
Recent Dr Who (not the fault of Jody Whittaker who is good imo)

I have a rather heretical view: I really liked Poirot with Cyrus The Virus and Ron from Harry Potter. I figure now David Suchet has nailed the set, it frees the field for looser interpretations.

Really? Or did you just enjoy how much the 'gammon' tendency was infuriated by it? I think the comical miscasting of John Malkovich and the leaden Brexit references covered up the fundamental weakness of the adaptation. Spoiler ahead. The whole point of Christie's story was that the grandiose set of crimes ended up being a cover for an essentially venal and conventional murder for financial gain. It is a statement about the banality of evil. It wasn't that the silly fart of a writer who perpetrated the adaptation had no reverence for the source material - she had no understanding of it.

Cyclefree said:

I have never ever watched any of the shows you guys are mentioning. Apart from Fleabag which I loved. When do you all find the time to watch all this TV, I’d like to know.

It is a mark of our collective failings.
Otherwise PB might have more excellent thread headers....

ydoethur said:

HYUFD said:

Starmer says Labour needs to regain its 'message of opportunity'

I would have said a ‘message of sanity’ would be a better starting point.

Let's face it none of the candidates are neither use nor ornament. That said RLB is by far the worst. Compare and contrast this bun fight with last year's Tory leadership contest. If that was Premier League this is by comparison Hackney Marshes Sunday League.

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229497457488338944?s=20

I reckon that’s just about peak Bloomberg.
(Fingers crossed...)

rural_voter said:

speedy2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

IanB2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

IanB2 said:

BBC - don’t forget Line of Duty

Or Sherlock, or Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Seriously?

I'd rather have some decent SciFi sorry. Again 10 episodes a season but frequently with a 2 year gap between seasons.

Americans manage 24 episodes a season annually on many of their shows.

The Americans churn them out until they become so dreadful that everyone loses interest.

100 episodes of greatness followed by some crap is better than 6 decent episodes but then no followup.

I agree, the Americans can produce 100 watchable episodes of anything within 3 years, followed by writers block and repetitions.

The BBC tried it only once with Allo Allo.

It seems very hard to do 100 episodes of 'peak comedy'. Fawlty Towers stopped after 12 episodes because they thought they'd gone on long enough.

Wikipedia says Yes Minister had 38 episodes = good considering how funny they were. But with Yes Prime Minister it tailed off a bit.

Dad’s Army ran to 80, and until the final eight the quality remained high.